For the latter, well, just see the gobs of information and quotes online with regard to “if you aren’t moving forward you are standing still” … “don’t look back or you’ll miss what is in front of you” … “don’t look back you are not going that way” or some crap like that.

I would note we see all that … as if no one knows that movement, and progress, is good. But. that is the ‘forward progress theory’ business.

That said.

The bravest thing you can do is to not look back. Why do I say ‘brave’? We make it really hard to not look back. Really hard. Day in and day out everything around you pounds on you for what did you learn and how are you applying it and ‘if you don’t know that then how can you be sure that is the right thing to do?” … crap like that.

Okay.

Semi useful thinking crap like that.

But what it really means is that anyone truly desiring to move forward, intent on progress, keeps getting dragged back time and again to the past.

What, or who, is the main culprit of this almost unhealthy relationship with the past?

“Those who do not learn from the past are doomed to make the same mistakes.”

Christalmighty.“Doomed.”

No wonder people afraid of some risk or hesitate to move forward keep looking backwards. Doom is never a particularly desirable objective if you care about your career <or anything for that matter>.

The ‘doomed’ aspect <which older business people toss around like confetti in meetings> means we are almost demanded to not only invest energy in the past but, in some cases, encouraged to hold on to past learnings with ragged claws. That said … I will go back to the bravery aspect because I could argue the truest bravery, in this sense, resides in two places:

Not looking back once you have decided to move forward.

Not looking back when you purposefully stand still.

Yeah.

First. There are actually times to just go. Go and do. Maybe not ‘go’ as meant by leaning on instincts <I called it ‘decision faking by intuition‘ but research tends to show instincts are less important than experience> but lean on your experience to guide you through the context of your progress. The truth is that the past cannot show you all the shit you need to know as you move forward. It only shows aspects of shit you should be aware of. And, worse, the past has nasty habit of not encouraging you to reflect on the context of all the aspects just the aspects themselves. Therefore history is truly only important in parts and not the whole.

You have to grab the scraps of what you need from the past and create a new whole in moving forward. And that is where bravery steps up to the plate. More often than not you are creating a new whole … a slightly different version of what was. Yeah. That is different than the past <it s actually something new>. Yeah. Everyone is actually a creator, a discoverer … albeit we don’t like to think about that. While this point is a generalization … if you know your shit … once you have decided to go … to move forward … don’t look back. Bravely face the new world ahead.

Yeah.

Second. There are actually times to stop. Stand still. Even amidst activity. Even amidst a crowd which seems like it is moving forward <albeit sometimes all you see is the movement>.

Stillness, strategic stillness, is possibly one of the scariest things anyone can ever do. When everyone and everything is moving you feel like you are ding something wrong in standing still. And, yet, by purposefully doing so you may be adding to the progress rather than taking away from it.

Here is what I know about purposefully standing still.

You have to accept the fact you are offering the type of energy that no matter where you are and no matter that you are still & not moving you are actually adding value to the space and time and progress to that which is around you. I can promise you that this takes a version of bravery.

Anyway.

Forward progress is difficult. Difficult in the mind <attitudes> and even in practice <behavior>. I could argue that it is so difficult because our natural instinct is to try and use the past to define what the future will look like. That is slightly crazy when you think about it. While the arc of time dictates the future will most likely replicate the past … well … that is the arc and not the details. It’s kind of like discussing strategy versus tactics. The strategy may remain the same or similar, but the tactics will vary in the context of time & situation.

Forward progress does take some bravery … some courage. Mostly because the future will always contain something you have never seen before or faced before. In other words … it will not be the same as it was.

I don’t think I am particularly brave but I certainly don’t look back once I decide to go … and I have no qualms with standing still amidst movement. I tend to believe it is not bravery but rather experience.

Ah.

Experience.

Maybe you need to be brave to gain useful experience?

Ok.

That’s another post for another day ……..

===================

“Sometimes people let the same problem make them miserable for years when they could just say, ‘So what’.

“You aren’t advertising to a standing army; you are advertising to a moving parade.”

—

David Ogilvy

===============

“One can resist the invasion of an army but one cannot resist the invasion of ideas.”

—

Victor Hugo

===============

“The pursuit of excellence is less profitable than the pursuit of bigness, but it can be more satisfying.”

–

David Ogilvy

==============

So.

Today I want to take a moment and comment on business responsibility and their choices with regard to what they say, or do not say, in advertising with regard to social issues. I believe business should take stands on social issues<thru advertising or just in general>.

I do so because in today’s heightened sense of politicism and divisive rhetoric a shitload of people are making noise about “advertising should honor the event and not use it to make a political statement” or “I don’t want to know what they think, I just want to by their product” and even some business people “I don’t want to disenfranchise my business from some good existing customers.”

Well. I am most likely in the minority within the marketing community on this issue but … that is nuts to me. It is nuts for a couple of reasons – first captures the idea that business is a fabric of society whether they like it or not &, second, choices offer clarity to people & people love clarity <as well as hate … and that is good>. The first is about accepting some society responsibility and the second is, frankly, business creating wealth thru self interest. I would also note that Peter Drucker also suggested businesses should not avoid social responsibility and that it could represent opportunities.

Responsibility <& Fabric of Society>.

If not then … then when?

Uhm.

If not me … then who?

I fully understand there are consequences & repercussions for your actions. But let me take a couple minute to talk about that ‘actions’ part. Far too often this discussion devolves into a simplistic binary choice – an ‘either/or’ choice.

You stand for this therefore you hate that. In other words you cannot be pro-choice and yet respectful or understanding of pro-life … you cannot desire stronger immigration rules and still be accepting of immigrants … you cannot believe in your religion and still accept that how others worship is good & worthy.

Let’s face it.

Life, in most cases , is not some simplistic binary choice. You can, and should, believe in something and yet still can, and should, be accepting and respectful of others views. To be clear … to be successful in this endeavor we would not only need to embrace respect but also assume that most people, let’s say maybe 99% of people, do the best they can and make the best decisions they can <no matter how flawed those decisions may look in our eyes>.

Which leads me back to business and advertising. I believe advertising, in general, should always seek to highlight the opportunity for us to see the better, or best, version of who and what we are. That is responsibility. And that is where I believe business marketing and advertising should not fear speaking out. And … I would point out … what I am suggesting is not political nor is it divisive but rather it is contributing to a better society. It is not stating what you believe is wrong … but rather that standing up and speaking out for what you believe is right. Companies make statements all the time. Maybe they do more vocally internally but part of any good organization is a sense of what they believe is right, versus wrong, and how they may define integrity & values.

Frankly. We need more companies standing up and vocalizing this publicly.

This is not about saying “you are wrong for believing this” or “we do not agree with you” but rather more about normalizing what is right.

Look.

This is not about free speech or any political motivation, per se, but it is about how business, and work life, is an important part of the societal fabric of who and what we are and how and what we think.

This also means a business has to slide around the infamous ‘political correctness’ obstacle.

In my eyes … if you want to discuss how political correctness has gone awry … it would be in the business world. Political correctness scared businesses from assuming a role they had gladly played in the past. It wasn’t too long ago that business played a significant role in shaping society. As Peter Drucker pointed out, back in the early 1990’s, something he discussed called “no more salvation by society” … a time in which businesses understood that work made up a significant portion of people’s lives and therefore they had some responsibility to investing in the fabric of society. As time and views have shifted toward ‘making a dollar’ and profits … the work place became less and less an extension of society but rather simply ‘a place to work and gain a paycheck’.

What an empty thought that is.

So empty that when meetings occurred to discuss ‘risk in their advertising’, and ‘what should we say’, was discussed … ‘social responsibility’ sat in the corner and had nothing to defend it … and businesses became afraid to make a stand on what they believed was good for society <and simply focused on ‘brand differentiation’ and ‘branding’ … in other words … I am gonna just worry about me and let you worry about you>.

Well.

This is not only sad … but wrong.

It is wrong for 2 reasons:

Our work lives, like it or not, represent a significant portion of our lives … not just in terms of sheer hours but also in terms of thinking we are exposed to, accepted behavior and general attitudes on what is right & what is wrong. For a business to avoid that ‘fabric of society’ responsibility is shameful. And … yeah … advertising is the most visible expression should they actually accept the responsibility.

Brand differentiation rarely resides in some obtuse technical or product differentiation but rather in character & personality. Some intrinsic motivator which compels a consumer to find an emotional connection with you & your brand. Making a choice to become part of the fabric of society permits people to allow you o become part of the fabric of their Life.

Ok.

Yeah. That said. I go back to the beginning … yeah … there are absolutely consequences for your actions. But that is what business positioning is really all about. Distinctness and forcing people to think … think about you as a company, think about what you are offering … and thinking about how they feel about you, your message … and themselves.

That is what business positioning and marketing and advertising, at its core, is all about. We far too often dumb it down into some ‘selling shit’ sound bite but … well … that is dumb. Dumb?

2. Choices, “edges” & Clarity <Self Interest>.

I talk with a shitload of business people … not about advertising or marketing per se … but rather about simply being successful in the marketplace.

I focus on distinction and not differentiation.

I focus on worrying about “me” and what I want to say rather than finding some elusive, and most likely nonexistent, ‘white space’ in some industry to shape what I ‘should say.’

I focus on saying the right things and doing it the right way and suggesting that if you tell people the right way to think about things that eventually people will see you as ‘right’ rather than ‘wrong.’

Yes. I know. People will debate with me and, to be fair, this whole discussion wanders along the razor thin line of inclusionary versus exclusionary. If your message is effective, concise and clear, it will absolutely be inclusionary for those who see themselves in what you have to say and offer … and potentially exclusionary to others at exactly the same time. However, when done well, a business’s advertising captures the brand’s distinctness <which is a campfire to those who want to be included> and offers a better version of people <so that people do not dislike you … they imply think ‘they are not for me’>. I would argue that IS the ultimate clarity & distinctness & differentiation.

Look. To do what I am suggesting a business has to set political correctness off to the side, not think about politics at all … and simply think about … well … people. The people who they desire to try their products and services and how they would like to showcase those people as the best version of themselves. Maybe show them the destination mentally or maybe even share the path. It doesn’t matter … it is intended to connect with some better version that resides in everyone of us. And then after thinking about all that … they have to place the burden of responsibility upon their shoulders, open the door and stride out into the world to share it with people.

In business we have a responsibility.

Yes. Even in the advertising and marketing business there is an almost overwhelming responsibility <which far too many people are not willing to accept this burden> beyond simply selling stuff.

——

“All of us who professionally use the mass media are the shapers of society. We can vulgarize that society. We can brutalize it. Or we can help lift it onto a higher level.”

Bill Bernbach

——-

“We are so busy measuring public opinion that we forget we can mold it. We are so busy listening to statistics we forget we can create them.”

Bill Bernbach

——-

It is a much easier burden to simply focus on profit and dollars — it is a straightforward black & white responsibility. Well. I would suggest to any business person reading this that … well … responsibility is responsibility. All responsibility is only as overwhelming or ‘whelming’ a you make it.

And if you do not accept your responsibility to tell the truth as excitingly and convincingly as you possibly can … lies will win and, worse, society will end up being shaped that way. If you choose to vulgarize the society or brutalize it … or even ignore it <all under the guise of ‘understanding what the consumer wants’> … society will lose.

To be clear.

I do not despair when I look at business in today’s world … or even marketing & advertising behavior <although it often pains me how often business passes on opportunities to be distinct out of what can only be ‘fear’>. But I do get aggravated. Ok. No. I get angry.

I get angry that we are not accepting the responsibility.

I get angry that we are not strong enough to accept the burden.

I get angry that many do not even presume the responsibility is within their purview.

Business, whether you like it or not, shapes society.

What we do matters.

Selling stuff may matter to our bottom line and the existence of our business, but we cannot ignore that a thriving business actually contributes to a greater good — the existence of a healthy society.

I could argue that while selling stuff is important that what really matters is the shaping of attitudes <which ultimately shapes behavior>.

Far too often, by simply focusing on ‘selling stuff’, the byproduct of our ignoring the larger responsibility is that we end up brutalizing society in some form or fashion. Am I suggesting that selling stuff or being profitable isn’t important? Of course not.

All I am suggesting is that how you sell stuff and be profitable matters.

And that you have a responsibility in how you do what you do.

Because how you do things impacts society.

It shapes society. It can vulgarize or brutalize … or invigorate and instill good.

How you do things has a power way beyond simply you or what you do in that moment.

How you do things is a pebble dropping into a pond.

Accepting the responsibility assumes you are neither impotent nor harmless.

——-

“Advertising is far from impotent or harmless; it is not a mere mirror image. Its power is real, and on the brink of a great increase. Not the power to brainwash overnight, but the power to create subtle and real change.

The power to prevail.”

Eric Clark, The Want Makers: Inside the World of Advertising, 1988

——

Your responsibility in business is sometimes subtle … but always real. I worry that business people everywhere, but in particular advertising & marketing, have become so focused on getting shit done and ‘attaining the bottom line’ that they have forgotten the responsibility.

I worry that business people worry so much about politics and ‘political correctness’ they have forgotten that when good people remain silent … the only one who wins is bad.

I ask everyone visiting today to think about what the thinking I offered today. This isn’t about causes. This isn’t about social responsibility <or the welfare of people>. This is about understanding that what you do impacts people. This is about whether you, as business people, accept the burden of responsibility to help shape a society which is a reflection of the best versions of who and what we are. That said. I would also ask everyone to ponder the fact silence also says something and, at some point, EVERYONE is going to be judged whether they said something or not <I. personally, would like to help my judgement by saying how I would like to be judged>.

Well.

In my eyes … if I am going to spend money on some advertisement and place my ad on some show where a gazillion people will see it … I am going to use my moment in the spotlight to aim for the best version of myself that I can. And aim to help people see the best version that they can be.

Will that piss some people off? Sure.

Does that make me wrong to try and meet that objective? No.

Silence is not an option. When you have the podium and he opportunity to speak … you accept the burden of responsibility and try and ‘lift society to a higher level.’

If you go online you will be barraged with positive, inspiring, “go get ’em” lists of “things to do today.” I am sure the intent is to encourage us to better ourselves and our lives (in fact I believe there is a whole section in bookstores for this crap).

You know.

Smile more.

Say something nice to someone.

Drink more water.

Sure.

All great reminders. Just not my thing. I don’t mind being happy, nice or hydrated. I just don’t feel the need to be encouraged, or reminded, to do so. Maybe it makes me sound like an asshole, but I just don’t care about that shit. I want to go “do.”

And then I came across a the list made by a teen/young adult shown in the opening image.

Awesome.

Now THIS is my type of thinking.

Yeah. I fully understand that sometimes the day to day grind of life makes you focus on just “getting through the day.”

Trying to be happier.

Trying to be nice so that we get some positive responses from those around us (which inevitably makes us feel better).

Trying to make sure you are hydrated so at least you will not pass out from the stress.

My only fear is that while we are trying to do all those things, you know, trying to be happy through the grind (and seemingly always driving toward that window of opportunity when we get glimpses of life that aren’t a grind and are uncluttered happy moments) we, well, forget to kick some ass.

Yeah, yeah, yeah.

I would imagine if every day all you did was focus on kicking ass and taking names you would be pretty much of an asshole and not have a lot of friendly co-workers.

But.

Kicking ass and taking names does create a different kind of happiness that smiling just cannot create.

And, yeah, it takes more effort than smiling and being nice (well, for most of us, excluding Donald Trump, the Wicked Witch of the West and Alan Rickman in the original Die Hard) but the ‘return’ is bigger. The return is … well … you kicked ass, did some good shit. most likely took some names along the way and have something good to show at the end of the day.

So, in my mind, when you make your list for the week make sure you have kick some ass somewhere on the list. Maybe even dedicate a day to it every week. Aw. Shit. What am I thinking? I want to wake up everyday and go kick some ass. That makes me smile. That makes me happy. That actually makes me nice to people. And I may actually even drink more water. Some of us just want to kick some ass.

I honesty don’t think this makes me an asshole, just possibly a pain in the ass.

That said.

Gotta go.

Time to at least take some names (but I will be looking for some ass kicking opportunities).

“Some people are born mediocre, some people achieve mediocrity, and some people have mediocrity thrust upon them.”

==

Joseph Heller

—————

“We must overcome the notion that we must be regular…it robs you of the chance to be extraordinary and leads you to the mediocre.”

==

Uta Hagen

——————

Ok.

One of the things that consistently amazes me in the business world is mediocrity.

Ok. Maybe better said …“comfort in mediocrity.”

I am exponentially amazed because if you were to interview 100 different business leaders about their organization and company vision nowhere within that entire interview would you hear “we seek mediocrity.” In fact I can almost guarantee there will be words like extraordinary, innovative, best, new and bla … bla … bla.

That said … mediocrity is a stellar example that you cannot believe what people say and what people say and what they do are often two completely different things. It makes you wonder a little that if everyone’s attitude is so expansive why is their actual behavior so minimal/restrictive?

One writer suggested the reason is ‘vainglory.’

“Vainglory,” an anachronistic term meaning an unjustified and excessive pride in one’s own achievements or abilities is one of the primary forces animating and shaping contemporary culture.

Yeah. I buy that theory.

Probably because I have seen it run rampant among successful entrepreneurs who now run their own companies. Well. Let me qualify that by saying they may represent the biggest ‘vainglory’ offenders (because large companies get mired in mediocrity too).

Ok.

To be fair (to those mired in mediocrity) it is possible the true effect of the recession in the business world is the creation of the ‘being safe’ attitude versus smart risk taking attitude & behavior. To be clear … I am not sure it’s the recession’s fault but I am trying to be fair.

Regardless.

Companies beware. The truth is that death resides in the zone of mediocrity (in a recession or not in a recession). Interestingly I think companies do beware. It’s the leaders who are failing the companies.

So.

Maybe I should say … Leaders beware. Be fearful of mediocrity. And be fearful of playing it safe.

At the root of mediocrity?

Try this on for size. Criticism seems to have replaced oppositional debate as a form of business acumen. Inherent in criticism is diminishing without enhancement. Oppositional debate is contrarianism with the intent to enhance. And, frankly, I don’t have too much to offer here on why that is happening. If it were a generation thing I may have an idea but the people criticizing (leaders) typically grew up in an oppositional debate business world. So I am not sure what is breeding this attitude & behavior.

But. Regardless. It’s happening.

And leaders are consistently permitting their organizations to get sucked into the world of mediocrity regardless of the criticism/debate thing I brought up. To me .. the worst is when a company with all the potential to succeed gets sucked into the zone mediocrity. It is frustrating to see. And painful to watch as they continue in a doom loop of mediocrity. Or maybe call it unfulfilled potential.

I can even identify some key characteristics of a company mired in mediocrity.

1. High churn of leader low-senior people (the ones who ache to not be mediocre and seek to take the calculated risks to break out).

They get frustrated. And they leave for greener grass when frustrated.

2. Low churn of low-senior people with middle age kids.

Oh. They will bitch. Make some noises.

But they know if they feed the mediocre machine (and get a small win here or there) they will never get fired. So they don’t take the day to day risks it often takes to rise above the zone of mediocrity. Worse? They learn to live within it.

3. High churn of young people. Especially the good ones.

The ones who have some ambition or maybe not a lot of ambition but want to learn stuff. They max out fast in the zone and hit a level of dissatisfaction quickly. These really hurt an organization because this group dials up the company culture of miserableness in a sneaky way. They aren’t really grumbling. It’s worse than grumbling. They simply ask questions among themselves. The “why” question. Why are we this way? Why aren’t we growing? Why wasn’t that idea discussed instead of the one that was? Why, why, why and why again. They sense that something is off kilter but they don’t know the answer.

They just keep asking the question.

And when all of that has swirled around long enough. When the repetition of mediocrity is solidly in place. After some time all groups and all employees and all people will get lulled into a sense of helplessness. They start believing they cannot fight ‘the man’ (it can be identified specifically as the leader or simply the organization as a whole) and so they lose sight, or the desire to actually sight, for a something better than mediocrity because of complacency.

In the end.

Being in the zone of mediocrity in the workplace is odd. A little strange. Something feels off, some in-office rhythm is missing, something is off kilter, off balance, out of place.

Its something you cannot really quite put a finger on.

And with all that it becomes … well … it becomes easy to get sucked into the zone of mediocrity. So what can you do? (other than bitch & moan & be mediocre).

If you are a leader? Lead. (but most people aren’t in leader positions).

If you are the rest of the world? Well. I cannot guarantee this will get you out of the zone all the time but you will feel better about yourself and more fulfilled as a person (and possibly be better armed to battle mediocrity).

Never stop learning.

The corollary to this is ‘never stop challenging the norm.’ And at this idea’s foundation is something called commitment. Never stop learning takes commitment. Because in the zone of mediocrity life is much much easier if you go with the flow and accept ‘that is the way it is done.’ Be committed to never stop learning. From anyone. From any place. At any time.

Develop a passion for something.

There is nothing like passion to create day-to-day energy. This is much much bigger than ‘overcoming fear of failure’ or learning from mistakes or any kind of crap like that. This is about positively moving toward some unseen objective – fueled by an internal passion. The best example I found was about Thomas Edison. It stated: Passion inspired Thomas Edison to develop the lightbulb. He failed more than 10,000 times. When he was asked what kept him going after so many failures, he said that he had not failed at all. What he had done was to find 10,000 ways that did not work.

Now. I will talk about resiliency next … but for now? That is passion. Find something to rally around. It’s easier to fight the good fight if you care.

No quit.

This is possibly better defined as “character resiliency.” This has nothing to do with trying and doing and day in and day out grinding it out. This is bigger picture stuff. This is about not giving up on what you dream or imagine. Mediocrity of almost all things in life takes a boatload of resiliency to face and defeat. I threw in character but at its core this is resiliency. Mediocrity is relentless and patient and sneaky. You cannot quit, ever, in your battle against mediocrity.

Ok. So. What happens if you don’t attempt the three things I suggest (or anything to get out of the mediocrity zone)?

Well.

If you don’t do this (and reside in the hellish zone of mediocrity) I have one word for you. Regret. Regrets are almost always about missed opportunities – failing to take the risks that could have led to a more fulfilling outcome.

Mediocrity is numbingly subtle.

Company leaders have to believe they are called to something bold and amazing. Even if it is simply engineering the best toilet. I read somewhere three keys to fighting your way out of this mediocrity malaise:

I believe we each hold within us a vast reservoir of courage.

I believe in doing something every day that scares the shit out of me.

I believe in burning my ships and declaring myself all in.

Love it.

Leaders should have it up on their wall. Breaking out of mediocrity means being courageous, scared shitless sometimes and being “all in” when making a decision.

Ok.

But before anyone thinks this is some wacky uncomfortable hi-risk leadership point of view. Let me say it takes all those things as well as some blending. Yeah. A blend. Blending risk and safety is the key to success. Too much of either is just not good stewardship. Foolish risk taking is as bad as mediocrity. Somewhere in the middle is the zone of success.

All that said. I am coming to the close on this topic.

Mediocrity is a simple thing to identify (if you are honest with yourself). Mediocrity is driven by inertia. So, saying that, mediocrity ends up actually being a choice (it doesn’t come naturally).

I will try and end this by explaining the zone of mediocrity and that choice I just mentioned by using Yeats:

“Turning and turning in the widening gyre/ The falcon cannot hear the falconer.”

Yeats suggests that at any moment forces are raveling and unraveling, forming and disintegrating in polarity (or, as one writer explained, “gyres” superimposed on each other with the apex or narrowest point of one at the center of the other’s base). Therefore moments of opportunity occur when time shifts from the outer to the inner gyre – somewhere within the constantly raveling & unraveling.

Leaders are always a focal point for a company’s constantly spinning gyre of ambition and desires. So that leader has to recognize the possibilities inherent in change and the accompanying risks. No change, or progress, occurs in the face of all this raveling & unraveling only through the choice to be mediocre – and not make change (or worse … not take advantage of the forming opportunities).

Their excuse for mediocrity? (if there is an excuse at all). Mediocrity occurs because the problem is that unraveling/raveling is rarely neat and the leader risks losing what is most important – the center. Or as

Yeats suggests:

“Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold”

And there in lies the true foundation of the zone of mediocrity.

Those in leadership positions of power and authority who foresee the possibility of ‘things falling part’ remain frozen in models that no longer function, or adapt, in a new environment. They fear losing what is at the center (which is certainly the closest to their soul & well being). So they refuse to embrace change and instead embrace mediocrity.

And in that, my friends, we end up in the infamous zone of mediocrity.

I am using a quote from a guy who probably was one of the best at seeking out ‘events’ rather than fear or avoid them. Therefore it would be impossible to use my time today to discuss worrying about things that will never happen and fear of what could be.

Instead this is all about the ‘impending event’ and fearing it.

In Nelson’s case it was huge cannons shooting big iron balls at him with the intent of taking his head off (and whoda thunk it would actually be a mini ball that would get him in the end).

But. You know what?

He took that bullet that killed him standing in full admiral dress uniform on the main deck in full view of his men and all his enemy to see. He was Leading.

Did he feel “fear?” Sure.

I am sure somewhere inside him he had to feel something. But the event took precedent.

I say that because fear, dread and worry are odd things. But very real odd things.

And because I am writing about ‘the event’ itself I will note these odd things affect ‘the event’. Ok. Maybe better said … they affect your performance at the event.

It is really important to talk about this. REALLY important. It is important because well all know that success, and effective performance, is most likely if in the moment of the event if you are not frozen with fear. It is actually called “seeking flow” (or Flow moments) but suffice it to say there is a certain ‘peace’, a certain contentment, if you can figure out how to accept the moment as it is (and you actually want to do your best at the event).

“Worry never robs tomorrow of its sorrow, it only saps today of its joy.”

Leo F. Buscaglia

——————-

I will change this quote for my needs and say “it only saps today of its energy.” The constant litany of everything that should have been done, everything that needs to be done, everything you wish you had time to have done … all of which (in your mind) should be done better … sap energy that could be invested in the event.

That is a fine list of things I just shared all of which I would suggest are driven of fear of the event.

Now.

I am not suggesting not being prepared or thinking through what needs to be done or anything like that. But events are meant to be commanded not feared. And the difference between approaching an event looking at both of these is significantly different.

I am sure we all have encountered that familiar tightening in your gut as you not only near the event but sometimes just even thinking about the damn thing.

And you know what? Deep breaths don’t do shit. Convincing yourself that everything will be okay doesn’t do shit. And building the perfect plan CERTAINLY doesn’t do shit.

(because inevitably it will all go to shit and you will fester and worry about that)

Let me tell you the conclusion of what will occur AFTER the event with worries … one of these 2 things:

“None of it happened (what I feared or worried about).”

“Some of what I feared happened.” (but it the world didn’t stop spinning)

Oh.

And then you will sit back and say “Shit, look at all the time I wasted.” (fearing the event) I dont want to dimsihs what anyone, and almost everyone, feels when an event occurs but the truth is that the anxiety and fear associated with the event is a big fat frickin’ waste of time.

Imagining how everything was going to turn out badly was a waste of energy.

(and the people who suggest that doing such things made everyone better prepared are wrong … unequivocally wrong)

Some guy who had a crappy education and ended up on CNN or something like that said: “I’d been so focused on my doubts, on replaying that tape of me at my worst, that I’d forgotten who was truly helping me become the best I could be.”

Dude.

You got it (the issue). And you got it (what you wanted). So why waste all that energy on your ‘worst’ or your fears of the event because, well, you got it.

Ok.

The point.

Yeah.

I purposefully selected probably one of the best naval commanders of all time to make this point.

You can fear the event or you can command the event.

Boldness, or commanding the moment, does have a certain power to it. I won’t call it magic but rather energy. And that makes fearing what is actually something that is inevitable (the event) is just plain silly. And just a plain waste of energy.

I don’t care if it’s a presentation, a speaking event, your driver’s test, an interview or even a frickin’ date.

They are inevitable events.

Seek to command.

Do not enter into the event in fear.

Stand on the deck amongst the bullets in full uniform and take what will come.

This is not just about creating value that matches wheat you want to charge but how you present can affect the perceptions.

Discussing value and price perceptions almost always reminds me of the following line from the Ballad of the Old Man of Leningrad: “and where is the end? You’ll find that out when you get there.”

We can discuss value until we are blue in the face … but you will never know what you have actually constructed <in someone’s head> until you get to the end <wherever that is … oh … oops … sorry … you never reach the end>.

We so often talk about ‘value’ in the business world as if it is some nirvana space that once it is attained you can look around in wonder and live happily ever after.

That’s nuts.

Value is a never ending equation <quest, objective, whatever>. As easily as you can gain it <although it is actually not that easy> you can just as easily lose it … or have it diminished … and even increased.

Anyway.

It constantly puzzles me how often I get into business discussions where people bitch & moan about not winning a project or assignment because (a)I had the lowest price but didn’t have the relationship or (b)my price was too high. And I could actually be having this conversation with two competitors in the same bidding process … who lost out to a third ;someone’ … who had neither relationships nor the lowest price and won.

I say that because this rant is about the fact that sometimes it isn’t about the price you are offering but rather how you presented yourself, or whatever it is you are presenting, and how that impacted the perception of the price you ‘should’ offer … which … unfortunately to many ‘bid losers’ … is not the one you actually do offer. I used to think this was relatively basic business, if not sales, understanding that how you present yourself <what you actually show & say> creates a value perception in the audience … but then I realized it wasn’t as I kept getting caught up in this same discussion over and over again.

Look.

I have used a 5 page power point presentation <4 people each presenting one page> and won a bid process with highest price … and had a 50 page PowerPoint and won a bid process with next to lowest price.

Just to note … and I have lost both ways.

My point in noting the number of pages in the presentation is that … well … the number is irrelevant <as long as they are relevant & meaningful you can have a gazillion if you want>. But. It is all what you say … combined with how you say it … which leads to a created perception for value <or an offered price> prior to actually providing the cost/bid … then when you actually provide the cost it either is all aligned or it’s not.

But … sorry … there is no formula.

Regardless.

The presentation matters. People say “I had the lowest bid <but I didn’t win>.” Others say “we were too pricey <our price was too high>.” And when it happens <you lose> people want to dissect their pricing and the bid and gnash their teeth over how to lower their price “to be more competitive” or whatever.

Well … sure … you should certainly explore your pricing … but … typically your price is your price. And if you got the scope of work correct and can agree on how much time and effort it will take to complete the project scope <and that … by the way … can be a HUGE discussion and debate> … in the end … your price is your price.

But here is an unfortunate business truth … high prices win as often as low prices. And I know this for a fact because I dislike being the lowest and am okay with being the highest <prefer upper high> and have seen more wins than losses.

Uh oh.

Then what is it? <if I cannot blame my price!> Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm ………… Well. How about the presentation?

Because there is a presentation to price perception that needs to be factored in to any evaluation.

<note: this is often heresy to bring up … because typically the presentation has been fine tuned to a point where it is mind numbingly dull with no edges and therefore is flawless in all presenters minds>

Yup.

The presentation has to meet the price delivered.By the way … simplistically this means you can undersell yourself … as well as oversell yourself.

I say that because this is about alignment. And, no, this isn’t about ‘first impressions’ because a presentation is a compilation/summary of impressions. To be clear … we all know this <but I will remind you anyway> … we are evaluating things all the time.

And even if we recognize that we are evaluating <like in viewing a presentation> we still don’t even recognize much of the evaluation that takes place because much of it is actually usually automatic, subconscious. There has been a boatload of research done on evaluation which I will not bore you with … but will share a cliff notes summary of key points:

This process of evaluation can be broken down into the rising and falling of two perceptions: Perceived Cost and Perceived Benefit. To be clear, the cost of something is not just money. Cost is the receipt of something negative or the release of something positive whereas Benefit is the release of something negative or the receipt of something positive.

Any time a value presentation is made, be it a candy bar in the checkout rack at a grocery store, a pair of earrings online, or a proposal to marry, there is an initial phase when you open your mind “file cabinet” and pull the “folder” associated with whatever value is being presented. As you open this folder, certain things will jump out at you, influencing your initial perceived cost and benefit of the value presented. What is in that folder, what items you pull first, and how much each item affects you depends on two things:

1. Your history with the value presented

2. How it is initially presented

It’s also important to note here that the point at which a visitor makes a commitment to the transaction is not the same point at which they complete the transaction. The time between the commitment and the transaction should be as short and simple as possible. The more complex and time-consuming it is, the more chance the frustration of the transaction process or the “cold feet” effect could keep it from happening.

Look.

I have gobs of practical experience with this <and the scars to prove it> presentation to value perception alignment issue … but I also have some other interesting research on my side:

——————-

‘The pricing practices discussed are highly prevalent in today’s society. While classical economic theory suggests that people will act rationally, using cost benefit analysis to make choices, scientific research shows that this is not the case. Humans do not have the capacity to recognise and evaluate all the available information in today’s complex environment, nor the time or motivation. Instead, people use mental short-cuts, or heuristics, to deal with this complexity.

– Whilst heuristics can usefully guide our behaviour and allow humans to function in the world, they are not perfect calculations and are subject to occasional and sometimes costly mistakes. Importantly, heuristics leave people exposed to external influences, including pricing cues. The literature on pricing practices suggests that pricing cues provided by retailers can affect consumer behaviour and value perceptions.

– Compared to presenting a total price partitioning prices into a base price and surcharge can significantly increase consumers’ positive evaluations and purchase intentions, and can lower search intentions. This is because consumers may fail to fully adjust from the initial (lower) price of the base good and therefore underestimate the total price of the product.

– Evidence suggests that people tend to stick with the default option, even when this option has major, long-term consequences.’

University College London 2010

——————————-

Well.

Like it or not … even our presentations are being evaluated through this wacky thing called heuristics. Pricing cues abound within presentations <value cues certainly do abound> … and they scream at the top of their lungs even if you aren’t looking at them.

Even worse?

You can even be silent and be giving a price or value cue. For example.

Bach was a master of ‘negative space’ … building masterful musical combinations … he also used silences that are as eloquent and thought provoking as notes, tempo and syncopation.

<I used Bach because I tend to believe most of us who have built a presentation kind of feel like a composer>.

By the way. While you may be thinking I am only discussing big important presentations which have been rehearsed and rehearsed … but this discussion actually pertains to almost any size and quantity of project management discussions.

What do I mean?

Well.

I have seen 5000 project estimates generated for one business in one year. And on that type of business I have seen a tendency to simply slide an estimate across the table <or emailed> and just ask for a signature for go ahead. No presentation … just slide the estimate over to a client and look for the quick & easy ‘get it going’.

Uhm.

And the client customer slides it right back and says “nope … too <fill in value reason here>.”

And I have seen 5 project estimates generated for one business in one year … and even on these businesses a project can be mis-presented or not even presented at all. And the client customer slides that one right back at ya too.

In the end.

Value is kind of like … well … the world and life In fact … it reminds me of something I read:

———————–

“The world is not as simple as we like to make it out to be. The outlines are often vague and it’s the details that count.

Nothing is really truly black or white and bad can be a disguise for good or beauty … and vice versa without one necessarily excluding the other.

Someone can both love and betray the object of its love … without diminishing the reality of the true feelings <and value>.

Life <and business whether we like to admit it or not> is an uncertain adventure in a diffuse landscape whose borders are constantly shifting where all frontiers are artificial <therefore unique is basically artificial in its inevitable obseletion> where at any moment everything can either end only to begin again … or finish suddenly forever … like an unexpected blow from an axe.

Where the only absolute, coherent, indisputable and definitive reality … is death. We have such little time when you look at Life … a tiny lightning flash between two eternal nights.

Everything has to do with everything else.

Life is a succession of events that link with each other whether we want them to or not.”

Arturo Perez Revarte

——————————————

That all maybe too poetic in discussing something like giving presentations and creating value but simply put … “everything has to do with everything else.”

Well.

That certainly encompasses that wacky thing called ‘value.’ Presentations are part of everything. And if you are not careful … your presentation can send a different value, or price, cue than what you will actually offer as your price.

That is misaligned messaging <including non verbal cues into the messaging header>. And misaligned is bad <that is a Bruceism>.

So I thought I had left the whole right brain left brain discussion behind.

And it reared its ugly head again one more time just the other day. And <distressingly> it was in a business environment, with senior people, discussing people’s strengths & weaknesses.

Look.

This whole right brain, left brain thing about creativity versus ‘logical’ thinking has to stop.

Stop … now <please>.

The truth?

We use our whole brain for thinking. Not halves. And right brain left brain mumbo jumbo is just that … a bunch of mumbo jumbo crap.

Yup.

The whole thing is bullshit.

Trust me <you don’t really have to because I will share reasons why you should>. And if you don’t believe me … well … if you ever want to drive a psychologist/psychiatrist/neurologist/any ‘ist’ crazy … bring it up.

With that … a reminder on what his whole thing is. In the right-left mythology … the left brain is logical, ordered, and analytic, and it supports reading, speech, math, and reasoning. In the same myth … the right brain is more oriented towards feelings and emotions, spatial perception, and the arts, and is said to be more creative.

Well.

Interesting myth. And it is just a myth. It is wrong (wrong & wrong … and maybe even wrong again).

And we have actually known for at least 30 years that this characterization is incorrect.

In fact the guy who probably put us all in this mess originally <Mike Gazzaniga who created the study in the 60’s that some pop psychologist used to write some fantasy-like left/right brain business books that became best sellers> who was a pioneer of modern study of brain hemispheric differences immediately tried to put a stop to the craziness as soon as it began with a book chapter titled “Left brain, right brain: A debunking.”

And he did that 25 years ago.

<note: he wrote it because the original crap was begun after he did a brain hemisphere study in the 60’s>

And, yet, there is still plenty of bunk to go around.

Its crazy.

I myself have gnashed my teeth <and sometimes growled> against the “left brain / right brain” myth for years <probably not 25 but a bunch>. It usually is personal <and I believe this is so for most people>. People are always trying to tell me how “right-brained” I am <or left … I get confused>.

Which I always find amusing since whatever I am doing invariably needs whatever the other side of the brain was supposed to be doing.

Plus. I would like to think I am using my whole frickin’ brain.

But.

It mostly aggravates me ,and kind of disturbs me> because it is deliberately misleading.

It has been used to support endless management dialogue telling us that we should liberate ourselves from too much left-brain ‘logical’ thinking and enjoy the fruits of our liberated, right-brained creativity <or vice versa depending on your management belief system>.

Look.

People may be inherently more visual, aural, spatial, sequential, intuitive, rational <or irrational> talented or non-talented … but it ain’t because of anything to do with left versus right brain.

Ok.

If you don’t trust me I pulled this from a medical journal.

A more technical explanation of how the whole thing went haywire:

==

You’ve probably heard this left/ right brain dichotomy before. It goes something like this: the left hemisphere of the brain is logical, deductive, mathematical, etc., while the right hemisphere is artistic, visual and imaginative. The idea stems at least partly from the classic studies of split brain patients performed by Sperry and Gazzaniga in the 1960s.

There are some functional asymmetries in the brain, and it is true that certain regions of both hemispheres are specialized for particular functions. Speech illustrates this, but also shows that nothing is ever so simple when it comes to the brain: in most right-handed people, speech is processed in both hemispheres, but predominantly in the left. In some left-handers, speech is processed either predominantly in the right hemisphere or on both sides.

So the notion that someone is “left-brained” or “right-brained” is absolute nonsense. All complex behaviours and cognitive functions require the integrated actions of multiple brain regions in both hemispheres of the brain. All types of information are probably processed in both the left and right hemispheres (perhaps in different ways, so that the processing carried out on one side of the brain complements, rather than substitutes, that being carried out on the other).

An article was published this week in the venerable (and reliable) psychology journal Psychological Bulletin, which synthesized 67 brain imaging studies of creativity. Among other things, it showed that creativity is not especially a right-brain function. In fact, two of three broad classes of creative thought that have been studied seem not to depend on a single set of brain structures.

What we call “creativity” is so diverse that it can’t be localized in the brain very well.

One might think that this study would put to rest at least part of the left brain/right brain mythology, namely, that the right hemisphere of the brain is more responsible for creative thought than the left.

One would think so, but I wouldn’t count on it.

==

My conclusion?

I put the whole right/left brain thing in the same category as reading a horoscope or reading my own tarot cards. If you give someone a vague positive description in which they can see themselves they will tend to agree with you. And that is dangerous on a number of levels <if people actually believe it>.

Ok.

Here is the main reason I bring this up <beyond the fact it drives me crazy and it is still being seriously discussed in the business world>. It has a detrimental effect on education and how we manage our youth. It is as bad as social profiling when it comes to kids.

Left brain kid.

Right brain kid.

You carry that label and not only does the child begin to see themselves in that label <it is kind of a self-fulfilling prophecy> the adults tag the child with the label. And start treating them that way. And expecting things based on the labeling.

All of a sudden the child is placed on the left, or right, brain treadmill <oops … I meant to say moving sidewalk>.

And then they are left there.

Uh oh.

One day the child wants to jump off the treadmill to hop on the other one for a while … <adults> “whoa … get back on your treadmill … you know that other one is only for the right brainers … and you will be much more successful on the left brain treadmill <sidewalk>.”

That, my friends, reads scary even if it seems just a theory.

And we all know that at some place, at some time, with some children … this is actually happening.

We need to squash this left/right brain myth forever. Now <please … again>.

We use all of our brain.

Brains are ambidextrous.

And even if you, personally, do not want to believe this, well, please … at least teach kids that is is so.

====================================

“Rabbit’s clever,” said Pooh thoughtfully.“Yes,” said Piglet, “Rabbit’s clever.”“And he has Brain.”“Yes,” said Piglet, “Rabbit has Brain.”There was a long silence.“I suppose,” said Pooh, “that that’s why he never understands anything.”

Generally said if the affected person should free himself from materialism or minor important things, thus set his mind over those and hence care about more crucial things, not seldom his own well-being for his plans on particular upcoming events might seriously damage his health, his reputation or the like, thus could cause him more harm than intended before – therefore mind over matter settles the issue in advance by barring the person from dealing with the issue(s) himself.

====

Mind Over Matter Urban Dictionary

———-

Well.

Mind over matter may be one of the most important trite quips in human history.

I will point out that despite its overuse and triteness, the entire concept of ‘getting your head straight’ or ‘getting your head in the game’ is maybe the most important Life & professional advise you will ever get. At its most base level mind over matter has nothing to do with positive thinking nor does it have to do with ‘doing what you are destined to do’ and has everything to do with simply making sure you are mentally prepared for whatever you are going to do or face.

I have written probably a hundred posts about mind over matter without ever directly addressing mind over matter.

Pretty much everything I write about centers on attitude and understanding how to get your mind right so you can get ahead and go do the rights things <as in the things you want to do>.

Mind over matter … well … matters because what you can actually do is often exponentially larger than what your mind thinks you can do. In other words … you need to convince your mind to see your potential. By the way, this does not mean you can do the impossible … it simply means that your head very often underestimates, practically speaking, how much you can matter in actual ‘doing shit’. In other words … you often can do more than your head may see you can do.

Now. That said.

This brings up my only real issue with mind over matter. The positive psychology crap people seem to want to prescribe & apply to mind over matter. The positive psychology implies if you believe something it will happen. Or if you think positive things that good things will happen.

That’s bullshit.

The mind just gets you in the game. You gotta work hard to win the game.

This means that mind over matter is more often than not about happiness or positivity … it is more about recognizing real obstacles & challenges and mentally preparing yourself to deal with it all. Uhm. Recognizing … not actually accept all of it.

Just accept that “it” is there and will be a burden you will carry as you pursue your objective or step out on whatever path you elect to walk toward your vision. And, yes, it is a burden and, yes, you shouldn’t seek to lighten it but rather accept it. In other words … you will quickly discover you need to accept a sense of being uncomfortable. That is the key to the mind part of the mind over matter.

Mind over matter is about getting your head in the right place for the journey. It is not about believing you can do something impossible. In the end this means you recognize the journey is the challenge and the destination is the reward.

Anyway.

Sometimes we think of our bodies and minds as two distinct entities. And in some ways they are. But in order to maximize your potential and fulfill your purpose <which is more often than not inspired by the mind> you need to enable a more intertwined you – align the body & the mind. Researchers have certainly found evidence that the brain has a distinct power to manipulate the body’s physiology. This means if you get everything aligned in the ‘mind over matter’ that the mind/body connection can work in your favor … or against you … depending on your attitude and your ability to manage your mind.

Suffice it to say that believing in yourself is all about self-esteem and affects self-actualization <Maslow stuff>.

And mind over matter is believing you are prepared to face whatever believing in yourself throws at you.

Simplistically … you either believe you can do something or you don’t.

I believe it was Plato who wrote that the body can only move when pushed by others or when it is propelled forward by a soul or principle of life within it. This suggests an intertwining between mind, brain, body and soul. That, to me, is the formula of mind over matter in which it is the mind <attitudes> that drives the body <behavior> through the brain <intellect> … and the soul, the passion behind your purpose, is the engine.

It our minds that tie our behavior to the desires, aspirations, aims, ambitions and goals we may have.

I will note that preeminent philosophers have danced on this head of a pin over mind versus matter for centuries.

I, being an everyday schumck, would simply suggest that all that matters is you get your mind in a good place, get your head on straight and work hard. You may not get exactly what you want and get where you want but what will matter is you made the attempt and did your best.

And, frankly, pragmatically & honestly, some of us find out that sometimes your best isn’t good enough. Sometimes the world or the path Life places in front of you is more than what you have.

But … well … you know what? That’s okay. Life gives you hundreds of paths to walk.

Mind over matter opens you up to not only the first path you choose but offers you the resilience to walk another path should you stumble upon the one you first chose. And then another after that if needed.

The “Manifesto of Futurism,” written by Filippo Tommaso Marinetti was published on the front page of the French newspaper Le Figaro on February 20, 1909. It proclaimed the desire of the author, and his fellow Futurists, to abandon the past and embrace the future.The point here on the whole concept of a “Futurist” is that their very existence is disdainful of the present.

Anyway.

Should we have an eye to the future? Absolutely.To not do so is to remain stagnant with regard to thinking.

Should we ignore the present? Absolutely not.

If there was ever a time that a Futurist discussed the present … now would be the time.

——–

I still believe the same now as I did then.

Future thinking is purchased in the present. In other words … something existing within the present – most likely some type of behavior … is the future opportunity.

Saying that permits me to say that I believe Futurists … or the label/title … is kind of silly. Suffice it to say looking at trends and envisioning ‘what could be’ doesn’t need a title.

And you certainly cannot earn a living doing it if you get paid for successful futuristic prognostication.

Why?

Because the probability of being right is very very low.

Pretty much every so called futurist <excepting maybe Toffler & Drucker … who never called themselves Futurists> has had an incredibly poor success rate in outlining future trends & behavior <and sometimes even attitudes>.

Moving beyond simply slamming futurists … in my mind … I believe futurists shouldn’t predict … they should inspire thinking <which could beget the future>. This kind of career activity is sort of like NASA.

Unintended innovations and learning.

<insert … ‘yikes’ … and how do you get funding for that these days?>

Speculating on future is all about inspiring thinking … thinking about possibilities and what ifs. And ‘what could be’s.’

This also means not get attached to any one idea or ‘trend’ too much but rather simply embrace the only thing you know for sure … things will change … and embrace change. And if ‘change is a’comin’ you always need to be thinking.

Oh. And not as predicting measured by success or failure.

Well.

Maybe the success objective is simply being in the realm of ‘not being surprised’ <or ‘well, that doesn’t surprise me’>.

Whew.

How’s that for an objective?

I imagine more companies really could use this type of futurist. The difficulty most likely resides in the fact a great thinking ‘futurist’ will typically not bear real tangible results in the present. Their present successes almost always reside in ‘working on ideas which will be used in the future.’

But.

Here is probably where I look at things more differently than any futurist in the world <which means I will never be a card carrying futurist because they will never give me a card> … the future is actually found in the now. Uhm. I mean that future ideas are actually found in the now.

Oh.

And ‘the now’ is not just in thinking … but in doing.

Thinking about what is happening now <attitudes>.

Thinking about what is being done today <behavior>.

Say what?

How can it be futuristic if it is just a derivative of something in the present?

<and feel free and insert a shitload of exclamation points in here if you would like>

Well.

To me real futuristic trending type thinking has to have a slightly pragmatic foundation residing somewhere in the minds of the rising generation. The real … the truly meaningful … behavior shifts occur not within a generation but within transition of generations. Therefore any pie in the sky type thinking has to be made up of some pie that <simplistically> the kids of the present have an interest in eating of. For any future type ideation will live or die not with existing attitude generations but more so in evolving attitude generations.

Now.

To be clear.

People’s attitudes do, and can, evolve as they age and experience things <and they are exposed to new and different attitudes and behavior>. But that isn’t futuristic thinking … that is simply critical mass thinking.

It’s a different ability. That is someone who can look at existing trends and attitudes … mostly looking at those that reside in fractions or in the minority of minds … and figuring out which ones will actually gain enough traction to attain the critical mass to ‘evolve’ the majority of attitudes.

I say that but also suggest that this is often a Sisyphean task.

Attitudes are imprints. They are almost like tattoos. Once established they are almost impossible to remove.

Think about what I would consider the ‘biggies’ of this generation … climate change and marriage <for everyone> … I could also add in equal opportunity.

Please do not get stuck on the examples … just focus on the fact that while I tend to believe the past minority point of views have shifted to a majority more mainstream view acceptance … there still remains a solid steadfast unrelenting minority attitude system in place.

Evolution of attitudes is like glaciers. And they also tend to follow generations … and not single generations.

Early adopter generation transitioning to a vocal minority generation to a majority acceptance generation and ultimately a 4th <and last> generation who not only has the attitudes but behavior is established.

Ok.

Back to what I consider a contrarian point of view on Futurists. I will begin with a quote … and a thought on character.

——-

“People do not seem to realize that their opinion of the world is also a confession of their character.“

Ralph Waldo Emerson

——–

Most ‘futurists’ are pompous holier-than-thou vocal nimwhits.
Okay.

That was harsh.

I will take back the nimwhit part.

Most are pretty sharp. But claiming to be a futurist isn’t about claiming to be some intellectual … or some highly intelligent individual … it is more a reflection of character.

Their character is reflected in a view on how you see the world and how you think about the world … and frankly … how you see people. More futurists should be paying more attention to their character than their predictions. I don’t have research on this and because I am not a futurist I am not qualified to predict future behavior … but … I would suggest that if futurists would do a self character attitude tune-up their actual professional behavior would most likely improve <their predictions would improve>.

<note: I am fairly sure I just got kicked off the futurist campus with that thought … especially the nitwit part>

Second <and lastly>.

Futurists have to look forward but seek truth in the young. Their predictions will never come true if there isn’t a pragmatic realistic foundation to be found within the youth. With no traction … the idea … shit … any future type idea … will die.

As I type this it sounds so obvious.

But it seems like futurists and trend identifiers seem to focus on today’s people and gaze at the horizon.

Well.

Paradoxically … future ideas are actually best found in looking backwards … at those who are coming up behind … the young.

Ah.

Shit.

What do I know.

I am not a futurist.

I like to live in the present & make sure I have a future to be doing something in. Uhm. Isn’t that a Futurist?

I interact with behavioral philosophers, economists & scientists all the time. We are all truly in the attitude & behavior business constantly scanning the world for why people do the things they do & try and isolate things which they may be interested in doing in the future. None of them seriously call themselves “futurists.” Most think the term is kind of snake oily & slightly absurd. This leads me to discuss this whole idea of ‘being a Futurist’ through a book called The Futurist <by a guy named Ottmer>.

But before I discuss the book … this overall topic is one of my favorite. Ahhhhhhhhhhhh … let me clarify … one of my favorite cynical topics. I view the fact that there are these bullshit slinging presenters and trend watchers prognosticator wannabes, who call themselves ‘Futurists’, who make an amazing living off of sound bite thoughts quite cynically <and even slightly dismissively>.

Do I begrudge them the ability to find a sound bite? Nope.

What I do have a grudge against is that I, and many other people, then have to invest an inordinate amount of energy explaining to people that the sound bite is just that … a sound bite … a simplistic meaningless irrelevant concept in the real world. We have to spend gobs of energy explaining why the ‘future speculation’ isn’t even speculation but rather as likely as a herd of unicorns coming over the horizon.

And then I found a book with someone who apparently has the same cynical attitude with regard to these ‘trend spotters.’ <note: I wish I had written this book>

So.

The Futurist. In case you don’t want to read this well written quasi-fun, quasi-cynical fictional look at the “buzz creator” future trends world, here is nutshell look at these pop-culture bullshit artists using the opening speech at the Futureworld conference <a fictional conference> by JP Yates <a fictional person/futurist> in the book:

————-

I realized this morning over breakfast that I’ve spent a good portion of my life seeking the approval of people I can’t stand.

Including myself.

The truth is, I know nothing. Understand nothing.

I try. I am not lazy. But the more I try to understand something the more intertwined and complex it seems. The more I realize I am out of the proverbial loop. The literal loop. The existential loop. The more I think of things the more I question whether anyone is properly looped. In fact, I challenge the very existence of the loop, proverbial, literal or metaphorical. So this is a fundamental problem, being out of a loop that I don’t even believe in.

Most books or movies or creation myths have a hero who knows all there is to know about at least one thing. And he uses that gift to overcome an obvious and blatant evil adversary. He has insider knowledge. Special gifts. Ingenious ways of getting to the core of things. The answer. The solution. The truth. He knows what’s right and wrong. He knows what’s next. And he knows what to do about it.

I don’t.

I don’t understand the present let alone the fucking future.

Yet we claim to understand. Pretend to. Some actually believe it, that they do know. You know the people. The ones who talk about such things with such cocksure passion that you think, shit, maybe they do know, maybe they really do. They speak in absolutes. Blacks and whites. They speak with soothing partisan simplicity. They speak with their hands and use Powerpoint like a sword. They quote people you ought to know more about. They work on a privileged higher plane and posit their views with a condescending subterranean confidence, convincing you not to worry, that forces are at work on other levels, levels that simple folks like us cannot even begin to fathom, so it’s best not to worry your pretty little head about it and trust them, the experts, that this is the way it is. And the way it will be.

People get rich and powerful operating this way, perpetuating the myth of the uber level, the exclusive loop. Dispensing their wisdom and opinions and edicts to the masses. Breaking down the conflicting moral, political and economic issues of 52 billion people into a binary proposition. Yes or no. War or peace. Good or bad. With us or against us. Ginger or Mary Ann.

Presidents work on this level. And dictators. Talk show hosts. Professional wrestlers. Actresses on the steps of the capitol. Conservatives. Liberals. The members of VFW Post #442. CEOs. Madison Avenue. Wall street. Sesame Street.

They’re all in the loop. All working on another level.

I’m not.

I don’t believe in the scared loop or the secret level.

In fact, I think the more people claim to absolutely know, the more clueless and insecure thery absolutely are. Of course, I can’t be sure of this.

Which brings me to us. And to me. Who do we think we are? Who did I think I was?

How can I call myself a futurist when I missed the most cataclysmic event of our time? How can I predict tomorrow when the world is on fire today?

How did I see reality TV coming but miss this?

And let’s be honest: we all did.

We make all these pronouncements but none of us ever goes back to check on their accuracy. Shit, if the people in this room were right just 1 percent of the time, we’d all be telecommuting from Tahiti, eating dinner in a pill form, and having literal sex with our virtual selves. But if you talk shit long enough, sooner or later you may actually be right, and if by some fluke that is the case, watch out, because any successful prediction is always followed by the cannibalistic scramble for credit – the blood grab to brand an original thought as your own.

We all want to be the first to be there to identify a “click moment”, but we live in a world that may never click again.

We’re great at telling people the future they need to buy into instead of the present they should be making the most of.

And what’s hilarious is that we all believe it. That we are geniuses. That we are all responsible for and deserving of our wealth. More deserving of the privileged life than, say, a teacher or a mason. A cleric or a hot dog vendor. Despite the fact that 99% of us did not create our good fortune. The markets did. Or luck. Or heredity.

I believed it.

But not anymore.

You see, we may be able to identify cool, but we can never invent it. Cool is never manufactured. You never try to be cool. It happens.

Same goes for goodness. And truth.

And the only truth I know …is that I know nothing. And even though you may dress the part – the missoni scarves, the yellow jumpsuits, the tiny glasses, the all-whites, the all-blacks, the Nehru’s, the sandals, the glittering gadgets – none of you know anything either. Sorry about that.

We are not innovators. We are fucking abominations.

To paraphrase someone smarter than me, who still knows nothing, the philosophical task of our age is for each of us to decide what it means to be a successful human being.

I don’t know the answer to that, but I would like to find out.

In the meantime, I know absolutely zilch.

I am the founding father of the Coalition of Clueless.

————-

Ok.

Beyond the ‘coalition of clueless what captured my feelings about so-called Futurists is this:

“We are not innovators, we are fucking abominations.”

Cynical?

Sure.

Have I felt this listening, or reading, to some of the popular trend spotter ‘gurus’? You betcha.

Do I wish I had written this? Absofuckinglutely.

This book led me on my merry way in it’s Futurist bashing in a way reminiscent of Joseph Heller (Good as Gold and maybe a business version of Catch-22).

I think the whole Futurist label is bullshit. A ‘futurist’ is one of those nifty bullshit words the business world uses for those pop psychologists who identify trends and recognizers of ‘future cool.’

And the book permitted me a glimpse into why I could have never been a successful ‘futurist’ … well … beyond the fact I suck at identifying meaningful trends of course … and that is futurists need to be blindingly optimistic with regard to prosperity … and I would be screwed because I am too pragmatic.

That said.

If you are a cynical pragmatist like me and you care about this topic you will love this book. Each chapter has a paragraph summary of former achievements of the protagonist/Futurist.

Like:

“He once spoke before the graduates of a Bible college in Virginia about the future of God and one week later delivered the keynote address to the Adult Video Distributors Conference in Vegas about the future of porn, and received standing ovations at both.”

<awesome … and real life practical truth>

Another.

“He used to believe that things were getting better. He thought that science had a heart and that progress had a conscience. Then came doubts, followed by questions and alarming insights. Soon this high-profile, big-ticket trend prognosticator was prophesying doom and gloom.

He began to criticize the present, and he warned of a more damaged tomorrow if we refused to change. He gave heads-ups and watch-outs, supported by facts and scientifically validated forecasts and cautionary tales.

But this kind of outlook left his audiences feeling troubled, which was not the desired effect. It was suggested that he might want to put a bit more of a smile back on his work. So he switched gears and began telling those audiences what they wanted to hear.”

That is a truth.

I guarantee it.

With all due respect to the names I will now use … Seth Godin, Faith Popcorn, Tipping Point guy … they are smart people with an ability to articulate old ideas in a fresh way so that they appear to be ‘future thinking.’ I love listening to them & scanning their articulations but they are not sharing unique ideas. They are simply <mostly … just to give some ideas the benefit of the doubt> taking other people’s ideas … or thoughts … or portions/fragments of thoughts … and re-presenting them not only with gusto but also in a slightly different sound bite <sic: somewhat bullshit for people to drool over> way to capture the interest of whomever they are writing to and for.

As the book said:

“The futurist was never cutting edge or far ahead of the curve. He was often only just a few minutes in front of the pack, or a couple seconds ahead of the global zeitgeist, or at least of the middle american one. It is rare, and a gift, to be able to see something was going to be big in a mainstream way months and sometimes years before your hipsters, your early adapters, your so called thought leaders embraced it.”

–

The Futurist

Look.

I understand that Futurists are trapped in between telling the truth of today and the hope of tomorrow. And I do not begrudge someone making a living selling some hope … but … once you begin making a living doing something like this at some point you reach a place where you have a choice of telling the truth or simply selling “possible hope.”

Hey.

I say that and I am clearly in the “possible hope” guy category.

The trap gets more difficult if you actually get something right.

Here is how it works.

Once you get one big thing right people will tend to forget all the previous things you got so very wrong. Even better?

Sometimes the evangelical following will then step up and try to find ways to make all the wrong prognostications, past present and future, seem right.

The book protagonist tells his fellow experts, “If the people in this room were right just 1 percent of the time, we’d all be telecommuting from Tahiti, eating dinner in pill form and having literal sex with our virtual selves.”

So.

The truth of a trend spotter or a ‘futurist’ is that they steal <reassemble> the thoughts of others and repurpose them for slightly different purposes under the guise of ‘recognizing disparate facts that impact the bigger picture.’ Once again … I do not begrudge them. That takes a skill.

In addition they also benefit from the fact that in this world it becomes acceptable to not to know the answers to the questions that the world asks every second of the day. It’s okay to not know what you want, where you want to go and who you want to become.

It’s okay to wonder.

It’s okay to question and ask.

And it is okay to not to know<although those listening then take it as gospel>.

And what’s not okay is to stop wondering. So the Futurist steps in and uses all of those to create a made up future world everyone can think about.

Ok.

All that said.

Here is a truth <and Futurists clearly understand this>. The people they are talking to don’t really want wisdom.

Those people just want shortcuts to getting more. Therefore if the message doesn’t match the ‘more’ desires ultimately it doesn’t engage the listeners because it doesn’t contain the inevitability of something positive.

It may sound cynical but nowadays a message needs a sense of some guarantee that prosperity will never end <that is a thought from the book>. And therein lies my biggest issue <and my love for the Futurist book> … the fact that trend watchers are seeking future prosperity versus discussing empowering present prosperity.

That “seek future vs. empower present” is a big topic and I really want to simply suggest that everyone read The Futurist if you have any thoughts on this type of thing <although I have a separate post coming up where I use a fabulous quote from a really smart guy who suggests if we spent the same amount of time on present thinking as we do on future thinking our present, and future, would be a shitload better>.

Oh.

And … back to the ‘what do I mean about using old/other people’s ideas?’

Futurist is an old term.

The “Manifesto of Futurism,” written by Filippo Tommaso Marinetti was published on the front page of the French newspaper Le Figaro on February 20, 1909. it proclaimed the desire of the author, and his fellow Futurists, to abandon the past and embrace the future.

The point here on the whole concept of a “Futurist” is that their very existence is disdainful of the present. It suggests at its core there is something wrong with the present and the present should be discarded for something yet to be done in the future. Personally I hate that thought.

I like to firmly place one foot in the present and one foot in the future and go do great things.

Anyway.

Should we have an eye to the future? Absolutely.

To not do so is to remain stagnant with regard to thinking.

Should we ignore the present? Absolutely not.

If there was ever a time that a Futurist discussed the present … now would be the time. But i imagine a Futurist wouldn’t earn a shitloads of money or sell a lot of books if the said something like “the Future is in the now.”

It is an excellent book if you like this kind of stuff. It is cynical enough to make you ponder some of the mumbo jumbo you have probably absorbed over the past years. And I guess, in my mind, that is a good enough reason to read the book.